Loading...
Fuat AYDOĞDU

Fuat AYDOĞDU

Expert Psychological Counselor

🇹🇷 TR
Back to Issue
Article Detail

Discourses of Students Studying in a Private University on Being a “Private University Student”

Umut Şah, Gülmin Candaş

Research Article Volume 3 Issue 1 22 February 2021 Pages 60-79 10.47793/hp.825310
PDF DergiPark DOI

Abstract

The aim of this study is to examine the explanations of students studying in a private (foundation) university on being a “private university student”. Within this scope, in-depth individual and focus group interviews were conducted with 19 students from different private universities so as to find out the discursive resources of their explanations. Interviews were recorded and then transcribed. Interview texts were analyzed through discourse analysis. As a result of the analysis, the explanations of the participants were separated into two main categories; “discourses on the private university” and “discourses on being a private university student”. Within the first category, two themes were obtained; “the quality of education” and “accessibility”. Within the second category, two themes were obtained; “unsuccessful/insufficient student” and “privileged/wealthy student”. Additionally, a typical ideological dilemma was seen in the explanations of the participants; “self-negation versus self-equalization”. The results of the study manifest that the participants explain “the private university” and “being a private university student” within a negative framework. Even though some advantages of private universities were mentioned, they were mostly described more negatively than public universities with regard to “the quality of education and academicians”. Relatedly, private university students were described as “unsuccessful/insufficient students” in comparison with public university students.

Keywords

private university student academician higher education discourse analysis
References
  1. Bayrak, B. (2007). Yükseköğretim kurumlarından beklenen hizmet kalitesi ve hizmet kalitesinin algılanmasına yönelik bir araştırma [Yayımlanmamış doktora tezi], Marmara Üniversitesi.
  2. Burr, V. (2012). Sosyal inşacılık (Çev. Sibel Arkonaç). Nobel.
  3. Potter, J. ve Wetherell, M. (1987). Discourse and social psychology: Beyond attitudes and behaviour. Sage.
  4. Sallan-Gül, S. ve Gül, H. (2014). Türkiye’de yükseköğretimin gelişimi, güncel durumu ve eleştirisi. Toplum ve Demokrasi, 8 (17-18), 51-66.
  5. Smith, J. A. (1995). Semi-structured interviewing and qualitative analysis. J. A. Smith, R. Harre, L. V. Langenhove (Ed.), Rethinking methods in psychology (s. 9-26) içinde. Sage.
  6. Şenses, F. (2007). Uluslararası gelişmeler ışığında Türkiye yükseköğretim sistemi: Temel eğilimler, sorunlar, çelişkiler ve öneriler. Economic Research Center, ODTÜ, Ankara. (http://erc.metu.edu.tr/en/system/files/menu/series07/0705.pdf)
  7. Tayyar, N. ve Dilşeker, F. (2012). Devlet ve vakıf üniversitelerinde hizmet kalitesi ve imajın öğrenci memnuniyetine etkisi. Muğla Üniversitesi Sosyal Bilimler Enstitüsü Dergisi, 28, 184-203.
  8. Toprak, M.A. (2018). Anadolu kentlerinin ekonomik ve politik alanında yeni bir aktör: Vakıf üniversiteleri. Mülkiye Dergisi, 42(3), 347-370.
  9. Vatansever, A. ve Gezici-Yalçın, M. (2014). “Ne ders olsa veririz”: Akademisyenin vasıfsız işçiye dönüşümü. İletişim Yayınları.
  10. Wetherell, M. & Potter, J. (1988). Discourse analysis and the identification of interpretative repertoires. C. Antaki (Ed.), Analysing Everyday Explanation: A Casebook of Methods içinde (s. 168-183). Sage.
  11. YÖK (Yükseköğretim Kurulu) (2007). Vakıf üniversiteleri raporu.
  12. YÖK, Ankara. YÖK (Yükseköğretim Kurulu) (2019). Vakıf yükseköğretim kurumları 2019 raporu. YÖK, Ankara.